Zhu Jingjing, Zhu Xiao, Tu Chao, Li Yuan-Yuan, Qian Ke-Qing, Jiang Cheng, Feng Tong-Bao, Li Changwei, Liu Guang Jian, Wu Lang
Division of Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Epidemiology Center, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, 37203.
Program of Quantitative Methods in Education, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55455.
Cancer Med. 2016 Apr;5(4):739-52. doi: 10.1002/cam4.604. Epub 2015 Dec 29.
Although observational studies have assessed the relationship between parity and thyroid cancer risk, the findings are inconsistent. To quantitatively assess the association, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed and Embase were searched up to January 2015. Prospective or case-control studies that evaluated the association between parity and thyroid cancer risk were included. We used the fixed-effects model to pool risk estimates. After literature search, 10 prospective studies, 12 case-control studies and 1 pooled analysis of 14 case-control studies including 8860 patients were identified. The studies had fair methodological quality. Pooled analysis suggested that there was a significant association between parity and risk of thyroid cancer (RR for parous versus nulliparous: 1.09, 95% CI 1.03-1.15; I2=33.4%). The positive association persisted in almost all strata of subgroup analyses based on study design, location, study quality, type of controls, and confounder adjustment, although in some strata statistical significance was not detected. By evaluating the number of parity, we identified that both parity number of 2 versus nulliparous and parity number of 3 versus nulliparous demonstrated significant positive associations (RR=1.11, 95% CI 1.01-1.22; I2=31.1% and RR=1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.33; I2=19.6% respectively). The dose-response analysis suggested neither a non-linear nor linear relationship between the number of parity and thyroid cancer risk. In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests a potential association between parity and risk of thyroid cancer in females. However, the lack of detection of a dose-response relationship suggests that further studies are needed to better understand the relationship.
尽管观察性研究已评估了生育次数与甲状腺癌风险之间的关系,但研究结果并不一致。为了定量评估这种关联,我们进行了一项系统评价和荟萃分析。检索了截至2015年1月的PubMed和Embase数据库。纳入了评估生育次数与甲状腺癌风险之间关联的前瞻性或病例对照研究。我们使用固定效应模型汇总风险估计值。文献检索后,共识别出10项前瞻性研究、12项病例对照研究以及1项对14项病例对照研究(包括8860例患者)的汇总分析。这些研究的方法学质量尚可。汇总分析表明,生育次数与甲状腺癌风险之间存在显著关联(经产与未生育者的风险比:1.09,95%可信区间1.03 - 1.15;I² = 33.4%)。基于研究设计、地点、研究质量、对照类型和混杂因素调整的亚组分析中,几乎所有亚组的这种正相关关系均持续存在,尽管在某些亚组中未检测到统计学显著性。通过评估生育次数,我们发现生育2次与未生育以及生育3次与未生育相比均显示出显著的正相关关系(风险比分别为1.11,95%可信区间1.01 - 1.22;I² = 31.1%以及风险比为1.16,95%可信区间1.01 - 1.33;I² = 19.6%)。剂量反应分析表明,生育次数与甲状腺癌风险之间既不存在非线性关系也不存在线性关系。总之,这项荟萃分析表明女性生育次数与甲状腺癌风险之间可能存在关联。然而,未检测到剂量反应关系表明需要进一步研究以更好地理解这种关系。